Introduction
Social media has revolutionized how we exchange information. Nowadays, we communicate primarily through social media applications, sharing our thoughts in a conversational manner via comments, tweets, blogs, and podcasts. There is often a perception that grassroots efforts, such as iReport, negatively reshape journalism by introducing amateur content into the professional sphere. However, I question this assumption. How does social media influence our communication aesthetics? Does it degrade our culture, or does it diversify our mass media communication?
The Dynamics of Communication
On one hand, when too many people talk simultaneously, the message tends to lose its power. Mixing noise with meaningful conversation can hinder effective communication, especially if one aims to reach a specific audience. I agree that well-edited programs and professionally reported pieces allow for a clearer understanding of the message. This one-to-many aesthetic fosters a coherent flow of information.
Conversely, we must consider the dichotomy of “dirty” information versus clean reporting. How credible are the sources, and how honest is the reporting? The ethics and aesthetics of mass media broadcasting are critical here. We should be able to distinguish between sensationalized reporting and verified news. However, with the rise of amateur content, social media disrupts this aesthetic and generates messages amid the noise. For instance, during the Chinese earthquake, information broke through the Great Firewall on Twitter, revealing truths through an amateur lens.
The Role of Amateurism
Is it truly a matter of professionals versus amateurs? Perhaps, this represents a societal learning curve amid technological advancements. Professionalism may begin to unchain the potential of the commons, empowering grassroots efforts in the face of established editorial control.
In the context of social media democracy, amid the overwhelming noise of information, we must learn to discern patterns of truth as they emerge from digital media. Recognizing and interpreting the dialogue of many-to-many communication is essential.
The Postmodern Perspective
From a postmodernist perspective, the skills of editors and journalists can be valuable. Postmodernism, by definition, rejects rigid theories and ideologies, instead emphasizing principles. The phrase “the medium is the message” underscores this idea.
To elaborate, theory serves as the observed science of nature and sociology, while ideology reflects our perspectives. Traditionally, we perceive things in a certain way, expressing the world through established norms. Modernism reconstructs these perceptions by presenting alternative realities. For example, one might say, “This is how I see a cow.” Postmodernism, however, deconstructs these realities to their bare essentials. It focuses on principles—visual expressions and new understandings of the world without relying on subjective viewpoints.
The Art of Communication
The art of communication parallels the evolution of art itself. Initially integral to everyday life, art became exclusive to the elite, akin to how communication evolved into a specialized craft. Fine art was associated with skill, superiority, and perfection, separated from mass culture. The same applies to news reporting. I often find myself disillusioned by local corporate news channels that reflect an elitist perspective, offering top-down interpretations of local events.
As technological advancements emerged toward the end of the 19th century, art gradually became accessible to the masses. Similarly, social media has penetrated households, allowing individuals to create their own art and news, thus birthing mass culture. However, social media aesthetics are still evolving.
The Shift in Mass Culture
In the 20th century, mass culture lacked immediate feedback from audiences, and media operated on a top-down approach. The information was delivered in a descending manner, reflective of that era’s social constructs. Today’s social media aesthetics promote a bottom-up motivation, highlighting grassroots efforts and instant news coverage. Regardless of the amateur or professional nature of the content, they represent a collective struggle to interpret news streams.
In the 21st century, with the rise of Web 2.0 and social media networks, audience feedback has become almost instantaneous, shaping mass culture. This shift can be divisive, especially regarding political and religious views, but it also allows artists and communicators to connect directly with their audiences and receive immediate feedback. Social media aesthetics promote this reverse flow of communication.
Conclusion
If we approach our information critically, we can separate facts from misinformation. One could argue that social media aesthetics shape our culture and lead us toward change. The true art of communication lies within the principles of postmodernism—seeking new identities, re-mediating and remixing content, delivering news alongside opinions and reactions. This dynamic fosters a rhetoric of immersion and the ability to translate the medium as the message, epitomizing the aesthetics of the 21st-century social media movement.
Suggested sources:
- Berger, J. (1972). Ways of seeing. Penguin Books.
- Flusser, V. (2011). The future of writing (N. Roth, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press.
- McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. McGraw-Hill.
- Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. Oxford University Press.
- Articles on social media and democracy: Use Google Scholar to access articles, e.g., Nature Communications or other peer-reviewed journals (Google Scholar).
- Case study on social media and the Chinese earthquake: Nature Portfolio. (2022). Social media and crisis communication: Breaking through barriers during the Chinese earthquake. Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-022-01352-x.
Mikhail Oparin 